Friday, January 28, 2011

25 Years ago today, I was home from school with cold and turned on CNN to watch the launch of the Space Shuttle Challenger.

Along with the rest of the world I watched as America's first civilian to fly into space, Teacher Christa Mcauliffe, along with the six other members of the the Challenger crew perished as the shuttle orbiter exploded shortly after launch.

Then, in what may have been his finest moment as President, Ronald Reagan led the nation in mourning their loss and honoring their courage and sacrifice.

NASA has set aside today as an official "Day of Remembrance" , not just for the Challenger Seven, but for all those we have lost in our quest to explore space.

Thursday, January 27, 2011

"LGBT rights are not special rights; they are human rights." - President Barack Obama

The White House

Office of the Press Secretary

For Immediate Release

January 27, 2011

Statement by the President on the Killing of David Kato

I am deeply saddened to learn of the murder of David Kato. In Uganda, David showed tremendous courage in speaking out against hate. He was a powerful advocate for fairness and freedom. The United States mourns his murder, and we recommit ourselves to David’s work.

At home and around the world, LGBT persons continue to be subjected to unconscionable bullying, discrimination, and hate. In the weeks preceding David Kato’s murder in Uganda, five members of the LGBT community in Honduras were also murdered. It is essential that the Governments of Uganda and Honduras investigate these killings and hold the perpetrators accountable.

LGBT rights are not special rights; they are human rights. My Administration will continue to strongly support human rights and assistance work on behalf of LGBT persons abroad. We do this because we recognize the threat faced by leaders like David Kato, and we share their commitment to advancing freedom, fairness, and equality for all.

I have often blogged about how the Conservative Religious Right in the United States has the same overall aims as the Taliban in Afghanistan. While their methods are NOT the same. (though the family of Dr. George Tiller might disagree...) Their overall aims are very similar. They seek to take their religious beliefs and turn those beliefs into civil law.

One of the great ironies of the Conservative movement is how many of their key leaders love to scream hysterically about some completely non-existent "threat" of Islamic or "Sharia" law. While at the same time seeking to impose a nearly identical form of religious law on the United States.

For all their rants about the threat of "Big Government" , these people have NO problem with idea that government should have total control over a women's reproductive health.

They have NO problem with Government saying what can and cannot happen in your bedroom, and they clearly believe the First Amendment applies ONLY to them. Their religious beliefs are the only ones that are "real" and therefore are the only ones that merit Government support and protection.

This fact, while always understood within the religious right, has never really been advocated publicly out in the open. That is until now. Michael Voris of Real Catholic TV recently explained why the United States needs a Christian dictator. One of his main reasons is that pro-gay, pro-abortion "parasitic" liberals get to vote. You may want to sit down before you watch this lunatic...

I have always said that people like Tony Perkins at the "Family Research Council", Pat Robertson, and James Dobson over at "Focus on the Family" , hate our democracy. They know that when faced with putting their true beliefs before the electorate they lose. Normally I would not waste time or blog space on these people, because they make it far too easy to ridicule them. They are so filled with hate against Americans and anyone else for that matter who is not made in their image.

That Video is the very definition of irrational religous-based hatred. And for once I find myself in agreement with George W. Bush. When asked to explain why there are groups and people who hate America, his patented response was always; "the extremists hate our freedoms." And he was absolutely right.

The American Evangelical Right, like their Islamic fundamentalist cousins, cannot abide a pluralistic society.

These Fundamentalist Christian Jihadists clearly hate the United States Constitution. The right to control one's own life, body, mind and spirit is a threat to them, and frankly scares them silly. They hate our freedoms. Yet the wonderful irony is that our system of pluralism, and the freedoms it provides is what gives the people like Michael Voris the right to spew his craziness all over the internet.
Make no mistake, or as President Obama might say; "let me be clear...", if people like Voris, Dobson, and Perkins had their way, only those people who march in lockstep with them, would have the right to vote.
Wow...

Wednesday, January 26, 2011

What came through the loudest in the SOTU last night was confirmation of everything we have seen over the past two years. Barack Obama is not a liberal or a progressive, he is a pro-business centrist.

I think part of the reason GOP obstruction has so baffled him, is because in truth the President feels that he and the GOP want essentially the same things, only in slightly different packaging.

The President's passing reference to "Don't Ask Don't Tell" was about as significant as GOP Respondent Paul Ryan's attempt to placate the Tea Part by invoking "the Founders". The Progressive base of the Democratic Party knows that when President Obama talks about progressive social issues, it means he would be willing to smile and take credit as he signs a bill, AFTER Congressional Democrats carry ALL the water to get it passed.

What was most significant about the speech tonight was what was NOT said.

For anyone hoping for movement on Marriage or Workplace equality, the restoration of sanity to our gun control laws, or a clear non-negotiable commitment to protect Social Security, the President's message was clear....

The Obama Administration will gladly sacrifice a progressive social agenda to cut deals on a centrist economic one.

Which is quite odd when you think about it. Because exactly one week ago, I got married. (That in and of itself is not the odd part.) But rather it is the lack of anything odd happing as a result of it, that is strange.

After all, I can't even count the number of times I have heard You, and your cadre of self-proclaimed "Family Values" proponents spew dire warnings of doom, gloom, apocalypse and general hubbub and brouhaha should Eric and I ever get married.

Well, guess what? We are now married, and have been for an entire week.

So.... Where are all the promised apocalyptic consequences? Where are the mass divorces of all the marriages Eric and I supposedly "attacked" one week ago, by tying the knot ourselves? Where is all the promised damage to millions of children who are now, (according to you), so confused as to what a marriage is?

Where are the plagues of frogs, locusts and boils? Where is the collapse of Western civilization as we know it, due to its very foundation being rent asunder by the HORROR of Eric and I getting married one week ago today?

Nothing? .... Anyone? ... Anybody? ... Really?
How terribly disappointing, And after you went to all that trouble to pay those actors to look so scared.

For years now , whenever the subject of marriage equality comes up as part of our national discourse, You claim it is an "attack" on marriage and the family. So I decided to look up the word `attack' in the dictionary. The Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary defines it as:

Attack
Pronunciation: &-'tak
Function: verb
1 : to set upon or work against forcefully
2 : to assail with unfriendly or bitter words
3 : to begin to affect or to act on injuriously
4 : to set to work on
5 : to threaten (a piece in chess) with immediate capture Hmmm… to set upon or work against forcefully huh? Ok, so if we take your argument seriously, for Eric and I to have the same rights as any other couple, not more rights, not any new rights that other couples do not currently have, but only the exact same rights, would injure, damage and potentially even destroy heterosexual marriages and families.

Uh.. ok.. How exactly?

Does the fact of my marriage now mean that you have lost the 1,100 federal benefits and protections that you had eight days ago? Does the fact that I am now married mean you and your spouse can no longer file a joint tax return, have, adopt or raise children, pass on social security survivor benefits, or make medical decisions for each other?

Does my being married now mean that people will no longer want to even get married. and if they are married, will now want to get divorced? Has your marriage or family changed in any way as result of what happened to me and my spouse a week ago today?

The answer of course, is no. None of your talking points on same sex marriage stand up to even basic common sense. But it's pretty clear that common sense isn't something you deal in very much.

You say that gay marriage cheapens or lessens the value of the institution of marriage in the eyes of society. But since none of the rights or benefits that you enjoy have changed in any way as result of my marriage; What you are really saying is that for YOU, Eric and I getting married has cheapened your own marriage in your own eyes.

My getting married means I now have something that, (again, according to you,) only heterosexuals are supposed to have . And that makes you mad. It's not just that you wanted to prevent Eric and I from having equal rights, you want make sure that we don't have any rights at all..

You see equal rights for us, as an attack on you. That's interesting...

Let's be honest Maggie, this isn't about "protecting marriage". It's about people you don't like, having the same rights as you . Even though your life clearly has not changed in ANY way, you firmly believe that your marriage now has less value, lower status, and the institution itself, could come to an end. All because Eric and I were able to get married last Monday.

It suddenly occurs to me there is a word for someone who is irrationally fixated on the preservation of inequality, that they feel is in their favor. It turns out, Merriam-Webster's dictionary has the same word for it.

Bigot
Pronunciation: 'bi-g&t
Function: noun
Etymology: Middle French, hypocrite, bigot
1: a person obstinately or intolerantly devoted to his or her own
opinions and prejudices

Sunday, January 16, 2011

Thursday, January 13, 2011

I am sitting here in the International Terminal at the San Francisco Airport (SFO), my flight to London will start boarding in about an hour or so. I only was back here in the states for 11 days. The reason for the quick turn-around however is very very cool...

That's right, after countless trips back and forth across the Atlantic, endless hours talking to each other over web cams and instant messenger, and SMS texts, Eric and I are finally getting married. Hence the need for the multiple trips back and forth .

The end of this long long LONG march down the aisle finally came into view on December 29th, when we went to our local county clerks office (Council Registry Office) in Lewisham, in South London. Where after much waiting and seperate "interviews" our names when up on a board in the hallway. Announcing to the good people of Lewisham our intention to tie the knot. Then we had to wait fifteen days and nights (which is really 16 days, they are not fooling anyone...) for anyone who had cause to object to formally do so. Shockingly enough, nobody did. which brings us to this next week.

On Monday, January 17th at Eleven O'Clock in the the morning Eric and I will walk back into the Lewisham Registry Office and do what many American Evangelical Conservatives have constant nightmares about. We will enter into a state sanctioned legally binding monogamous relationship between two consenting adults of no direct family relation...and the same gender. (gasp!)

The world is sure to come to to a cataclysmic end. So you better get out your "rapture jammies" now. So I can assume that all my conservative friends, who don't believe Eric and I have the same rights as they do to the "Pursuit of Happiness", will all be getting divorced next week. After all, according to their leaders, I am "attacking" their marriages.

James Dobson and his assorted ilk all have talked about their "fears" about what same sex marriage will do to America. Well boys, here's hoping we are the cause of your nightmares for years to come.

Last year Representative Giffords was one of a number of Democratic members of Congress who were targeted with rifle scope crosshairs graphics in an ad from Sarah Palin's political action committee.

Palin and her Teabagger Nutjob followers have used violent rhetoric non-stop for the past two years. Talking of "second amendment solutions" to political questions. Now the seeds that Palin and her ilk have planted are sprouting.

Make no mistake the GOP and and the Tebagging lunatics it has spawned have BLOOD ON THEIR HANDS TODAY.